MOBILE, Alabama – Spending for local government services,
public safety and public works continues to grow in Mobile at a time the city's
population is declining, a new report from a government think-tank released
today shows.

For Mobile, though, the growth in general government
services and public works is below the average of 10 comparable-sized cities
while public safety growth – police and fire – is growing a greater clip than
other communities, according to the study from the Alabama Policy Institute.

"In a very real sense, Mobile is at a tipping point,"
Cameron Smith, policy director and general counsel with the institute, said
today. "If Mobile is careful and judicious in allocating its spending, it can
avoid the trajectory of government continuing to grow despite population
trends. That is where Mobile city government has to be careful about."

The institute's report, "Follow the Money: Comparing the
Governments of Alabama's Four Largest Cities" analyzes government spending of
the state's four largest cities: Birmingham, Mobile, Montgomery and Huntsville.
The Alabama Policy Institute is regarded as a conservative think tank, but the
report does not include political policy conclusions and is heavily weighted on
its data.

In Mobile, only public safety costs are outpacing other
similar-sized cities. The city spends approximately $476 per capita on public
safety for $92.8 million, making it the fourth highest among similar sized
cities. Since 2000, the city's expenditures on public safety rose 51 percent.

The study indicates if Mobile were to reduce its public
safety costs to the 10-city average of $452, about $4.6 million could be saved
per year.

Mobile's 1,398 public safety workers equates to 7.2 employees
per 1,000 residents which is above the average of 6 employees per capita. Only
Richmond has more police officers and firefighters per capita. The growth is
also higher than fiscal years 1999-2000, when there were 6.6 public safety
workers per 1,000 residents.

At the same time, Mobile has shown a population decline from
198,915 people in 2000 to 195,111 in 2010, or a loss of 1.9 percent. Of the
comparable cities, only Jackson, Miss., showed a greater loss.

Smith said the study does not link population decline to a
rise in public safety costs. For instance, Jackson's public safety costs grew
the lowest among the 10 cities at only 12 percent.

Smith said a future study might include crime statistics to
see if there are correlations.

"It may be a correlation ... but we did not look at the study
to see if there is a specific correlation," he said.

The report shows Mobile doing a better job than most in
controlling costs with general government expenses (planning and development,
the mayor's office, legal services, and finance). On a per capita basis, the
city spends $162 per resident, which is less than the 10-city average of $257.

Public works costs are also lower than what other cities
spend. The per capita costs in 2010 for Mobile were $188, which was below the
average of $214.

"The narrative is one about Birmingham, where you lose 13
percent of your population yet your government rose significantly," Smith said.
"What you have is a relatively lower income per capita citizenry and it can't
pay for your bloated government with simple income tax."

He added, "it's a good lesson for Mobile to learn that we
need to learn from what's happening in a city like Birmingham and avoid that
trend. If your government is slightly growing and population is slightly
declining, you have the ability to make some changes and get it right."